Earlier today I renewed a call for Tom Kopko to resign as chairman of the Prince William County Republican Committee based on unsubstantiated rumors of potential voter fraud and a misreading of the Republican Party Plan as it applied to the reissued call for the 51st District Convention. I was wrong to make those demands, and I was wrong on what the Party Plan called for. I’d like to apologize to Tom Kopko and my readers for raising a big stink about something where I clearly got a lot of the facts wrong.

This is the second time I’ve made a mistake in regards to what is in the Party Plan (see Three Strikes Rule a Phantom). I’m fortunate to have some dedicated folks who will do everything they can to pick apart whatever I say (in particular Charles Richley and James Young), and while they can occasionally be somewhat frustrating, they do help to ensure that what eventually sorts out in the comment threads ends up as a consensus on what the facts are, or at least provide different perspectives where readers can form their own opinions. Sometimes I don’t give them enough credit for the valuable service they provide to readers, but this is an instance where their contributions clearly warrant considerable appreciation. I would rather they beat me up in order to ensure the truth comes out, than ignore my mistakes and allow them to remain unchallenged.

There are a lot of disturbing things going on in the 51st District, and attention to detail here is increasingly important as we move closer to the convention. I am disappointed in myself for not meeting the standards I want to consistently attain, and much of that can be attributed to me rushing to publish a post. With a little more discipline on my part that can be overcome, and I’m going to make every effort to exhibit that discipline. I will continue to appreciate the efforts of others to help ensure accuracy in what I report, and will do everything I can to help ensure that very little of that effort will be required.

The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

While Greg’s initial concerns about this issue were incorrect, there is still a very pertinent angle to this topic that I hope Greg will champion, despite this false start.

Party members and delegates must be absolutely clear on the procedures, before the convention, as to how it will be determined that one’s voter registration application has not been approved SOLELY because it was past the deadline of the SBE.

We MUST have assurances that every delegate who is not a registered voter at the time of the convention will have to 1. present a valid state ID, 2. prove that they are domiciled at a residence in the 51st district, and 3. prove that they are a U.S. citizen.

No, Charles. YOU are a very forgiving person when it comes to Faisal Gill. You have forgiven Faisal Gill repeatedly.

Most recently you have forgiven Faisal for a practice which Gill [,Ghafoor] and Gallinger still engage in, namely, advertising on their website http://gillgallinger.com that they will file last-minute asylum applications on behalf of illegal aliens awaiting deportation.

The target audience for this Gill [,Ghafoor] and Gallinger advertising is people awaiting deportation. These illegal aliens had many opportunities to file for asylum status prior to becoming subject to a deportation order.

I support Faisal. I agree entirely with the second sentence of the first paragraph. However, I believe that it’s as unfair to smear Julie as a “RINO” as it is to smear Faisal as he’s been smeared here.

“Just because I am employed by a criminal, it doesn’t make me a criminal. Just because I know a criminal, it doesn’t make me a criminal. Just because I’m related to a criminal, it doesn’t make me a criminal.”

1. Was he a “criminal” when he employed you. If so, you are a fool and lack good judgment.

2. Did he become a “criminal” while you were in his employ? If you remain, you are a fool and you lack good judgment.

3. This “criminal” with which you work - did you know that he had extensive “criminal affiliations” when you partnered with him - If so, you are a fool and lack good judgment.

4. These “criminals” you “know” - have you distanced yourself from them the instant that you knew they were engaged in potentially unsavory behavior - or did you continue to hang out with them on a regular basis? If you failed to put considerable distance between yourself and these “criminals,” then you are a fool and lack good judgment.

5. This relative of yours who is a “criminal” - do you spend time together regularly, or do you keep the relative at arm’s length? If you do not distance yourself as much as reasonably possible, then you are a fool and lack good judgment.

While you are certainly not responsible for the words or actions of your “criminal friends,” you are responsible for your decision to continue to be in their employ and to cavort with them regularly. Your decision to keep company with “criminals” shows that, at best, you lack good judgment.

How is Faisal’s association with unsavory characters any different than that of the President & Vice President of the USA?? Is there a higher standard for the VA HOD than there is for leader of the free world?

There is zero evidence that Gill knew about Amoudi’s criminality at the time. If someone has such evidence, bring it.

As far as I can see Julie Lucas doesn’t have the financial resources to run a serious campaign. She should’ve stayed put on the School Board. Her candidacy is done. I sense people on this blog realize this and are bitter.

“”"How is Faisal’s association with unsavory characters any different than that of the President & Vice President of the USA??”"”

In August 2000 Abdurahman Alamoudi stood in front of the White House and declared himself a supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah in between shouts of “Allah Akbar.” The incident was televised nationally.

President Bush and Hillary Clinton immediately returned their Alamoudi donations. Faisal Gill, on the other hand, went to work in April 2001 as the chief lobbyist for the organization that Abdurahman Alamoudi founded, funded and led, the American Muslim Council.

Big difference. On the one hand, President Bush gave back Alamoudi’s money. On the other hand, Faisal Gill took $10,000 of it that we know about, plus an additional $10,000 from the Alamoudi funded Islamic Institute.

“”"Is there a higher standard for the VA HOD than there is for leader of the free world?”"”

There is the same standard, but the actions of Bush and Alamoudi differ. After August 2000 Bush gave back the Alamoudi money. After August 2000 Faisal Gill accepted $10,000 from Alamoudi and started working for him.

Furthermore, as the President of the United States George W. Bush was not employed by Alamoudi as Alamoudi’s chief lobbyist. Faisal Gill was.

Should Faisal Gill have known that something was amiss with the AMC and Alamoudi? With a little due diligence, yes, he should have. Did he know? Maybe not. But, I would say that shows a lack of good judgment. I ALWAYS do my best to learn everything I can about my employer. It has been argued that Gill was not “employed” by AMC. Employed, consultant, whatever. In this era of the internet, to fail to google your perspective business associates is foolish. Employers by the thousands google their perspective employees - as they should.

Here’s what I found with a “google quickie”. Check out that publication date — November 2000 — that’s about 5 months before Gill’s documented work for the AMC began:

From the Wall Street Journal

CAMPAIGN 2000

Hillary and Hamas
The first lady has a long record of association with Islamic militants.

BY STEVEN EMERSON
Friday, November 3, 2000 12:01 a.m. EST

In the spring of 1996, I had lunch with a senior adviser to the Clinton Administration and to Hillary. I asked him if there was any concern over the article I had published in The Wall Street Journal that revealed that both the president and first lady had hosted militant Islamic groups, which had, at the White House, proclaimed their support for terrorism.

“This administration believes in a big tent.” the adviser responded. “Besides, we’ve gotten no flak, so why should we back off?”

Last week the first lady finally got some flak. As a result, Mrs. Clinton announced at an Oct. 25 news conference that she was returning $50,000 in campaign contributions raised by the American Muslim Alliance, an anti-Israeli group whose leaders have sanctioned terrorism, published anti-Semitic statements and repeatedly hosted conferences that were forums for denunciations of Jews and exhortations to wage jihad. Mrs. Clinton claimed she was unaware that the group was behind the fund-raiser, held in Boston in June. The first lady also revealed she was returning a $1,000 contribution from Abdulrahman Alamoudi, an official of the American Muslim Council, who has openly championed Hamas and defended other terrorists, including those behind the World Trade Center bombing.

The most telling moment of the first lady’s news conference–which has yet to be reported–came in response to a question as to why, she has met repeatedly over the years with other groups that had openly supported Hamas, Hezbollah and other foreign terrorist organizations.

“I think what you’re referring to,” she said, “is that over the course of the last seven years as part of the administration’s efforts to open lines of communication and build bridges with Muslim Americans and Muslim leaders from all over the world, many, many people have been invited to the White House. I have been part of some of those events. I have hosted some of them. I would imagine that some of the people who were invited were members of organizations with whom I would have had serious disagreements about some of the things those organizations have said. .?.?. So I think that if you want to talk about what the White House has tried to do, what the administration has tried to do to try to promote a framework for peace, it certainly included lines of communication to many different groups and many different individuals.”

Well, let’s look at the results of that effort to produce a “framework for peace,” which, according to White House records and published reports, began in early 1996, when Mrs. Clinton started hosting and inviting the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), the American Muslim Council (AMC) and the American Muslim Alliance (AMA).

What have these groups done since Mrs. Clinton began reaching out to them? On Sept. 16, 2000, at a Washington rally sponsored by CAIR, AMC, and MPAC, the head of CAIR, Nihad Awad, declared: “They [the Jews] have been saying ‘next year to Jerusalem’, we say “next year to all of Palestine!” (Mr. Awad also dissed Mrs. Clinton’s best friends in LA: “Hollywood has shown freedom fighters as terrorists. Hollywood has done the work that Zionists cannot do.”)

On Oct. 13, 2000, CAIR and the AMC sponsored a rally outside the Israeli Embassy in Washington where the speakers led the crowd in a chant: Khybar, Khybar, ya, ya Yahood, jesh Mohammed sofa ya’ud. (Translation: “Khybar Khybar, oh Jews, the army of Mohammed is coming for you.”) It is a refrain used by Hamas threatening the annihilation of Jews as was done to the Jewish tribe in Khybar, Saudi Arabia, by Mohammed in the year 628.

At another Washington rally, on Oct. 28, 2000, the AMC’s Mr. Alamoudi led the thousands in attendance to chant their support for Hamas and Hezbollah. “Hear that, Bill Clinton, we are all supporters of Hamas,” he declared. “I wish they argued that I am also a supporter of Hezbollah.” (When the New York Daily News asked about these comments earlier this week, Mr. Alamoudi denied making them, telling the reporter: “You better check your Arabic.” When the reporter noted that he had given the speech in English, Mr. Alamoudi replied, “It was in English? Oh my God, I forgot!”)

In 1998 AMC, CAIR and AMA hosted a rally at Brooklyn College where Islamic militants exhorted the attendees to carry out “jihad” and described Jews as “pigs and monkeys.” In 1999 these same groups, together with MPAC, sponsored a rally in Santa Clara, Calif., where speakers accused Israel and the U.S. of carrying out “a conspiracy” to “kill Muslims.” One speaker called for the death of Jews.

Of course, Mrs. Clinton cannot be held responsible for the views of other people. Or can she? What is her responsibility in hosting organizations that have championed Hamas and Hezbollah?

As first lady, Mrs. Clinton began in 1996 an outreach program to Muslim leaders in the U.S. With America’s Muslim population at some six million and growing, an effort to include the community’s leaders in the mainstream of American politics is unquestionably a worthy undertaking. But curiously, nearly all of the leaders with whom Mrs. Clinton elected to meet came from Islamic fundamentalist organizations. A review of the statements, publications and conferences of the groups Mrs. Clinton embraced shows unambiguously that they have long advocated or justified violence. By meeting with these groups, the first lady lent them legitimacy as “mainstream” and “moderate.”

One of the earliest groups with which Mrs. Clinton bonded was the AMC, which she invited to the White House in February 1996, for its first reception commemorating the end of Ramadan. Mrs. Clinton accepted a Koran and told the invited crowd how she acquired an appreciation of Islam through her daughter Chelsea.

By the time Mrs. Clinton reached out to the AMC in early 1996, that organization had clearly established a record in support of radical Islam. In a letter to the Philadelphia Inquirer published on Oct. 14, 1994, Mr. Alamoudi stated that the “major Islamic parties in Jordan, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt, Malaysia, Pakistan, and Turkey are undeniably moderates.” This is plainly false. Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, the Jordanian Islamic Action Front, Algeria’s Islamic Salvation Front and the Pakistani Jamaat-Islami have all endorsed or carried out violence. Mr. Alamoudi specifically declared in a March 5, 1993, Fox Television interview: “I am for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.”

In the aftermath of the February 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the AMC emerged as a defender of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, whose followers carried out the attack. Mr. Alamoudi rushed to the sheik’s defense immediately after the bombing. On CNN’s “Crossfire” (March 5, 1993) he said of Abdel Rahman: “An organizer of terror? No. The man has vulgar language. He might incite other people, but you cannot hold him for [terrorism].” In a letter to the Washington Times, published March 12, 1993, Mr. Alamoudi characterized the blind sheik as a “theologian” who advocated “democratization of the Egyptian political system.” In 1995 Abdel Rahman was convicted of conspiracy and sentenced to life in prison.

AMC served as the headquarters for the American-based offices of the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS), a fundamentalist organization that is dedicated to toppling the secular government of Algeria and that has carried out a campaign of terror, including beheadings and mutilations. In 1997 Anwar Haddam, the FIS leader who worked out of the AMC offices was arrested by U.S. authorities; he now faces deportation because of his support for terrorism.

Mr. Alamoudi publicly led the defense of Mousa Abu Marzuk, head of the Hamas political bureau, after Mr. Marzuk’s arrest on immigration charges at John F. Kennedy International Airport in July 1995. (Mr. Marzuk was deported in 1997.) Quoted in the Washington Post on July 28, 1995, Mr. Alamoudi declared the arrest “a hard insult to the Muslim community.” In 1996 Mr. Alamoudi declared on Middle East television that “I am honored to be a member of the committee that is defending Mousa Abu Marzuk in America.” Such views should not have been surprising. On the Charlie Rose show broadcast on Nov. 21, 1994, I asked Mr. Alamoudi whether he considered Hamas to be a terrorist group. “No, it’s not,” he replied.

On May 9, 1996, Mrs. Clinton met with an Arab delegation that included Muthanna Hanooti, public relations director of the Islamic Relief Association (the meeting had been arranged by Rep. David Bonior of Michigan). Although constituted as a nonprofit charity, the Islamic Relief Association clearly has a militant agenda.

On April 21, 1996–less than three weeks before the meeting with Mrs. Clinton–the association had held a fund-raiser in Brooklyn, N.Y., where the main speaker was Sheik Abdulmunem Abu Zant, a militant Jordanian cleric. From 1990 to 1998, Mr. Abu Zant was a deputy in the Jordanian parliament and the self-proclaimed leader of the most radical wing of the Islamic Action Front. He is an ardent supporter of Hamas and has repeatedly called for holy war against Israel and the U.S. During the 1991 Gulf War, Mr. Abu Zant stated that the conflict “is not a war between Iraq and the U.S., but rather one between Islam and the infidels.” In August 1990 he gave a sermon, during which he thundered: “May God attack the Jews and those who stand with them. May God attack the Americans and those who stand with them.”

Mrs. Clinton also embraced the Muslim Women’s League and its parent group, the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), headed respectively by Leila Al-Marayati and her husband, Salam Al-Marayati. In her speech to these groups in Los Angeles in May 1996, the first lady lauded her hosts for fighting “hatred.” Mrs. Clinton’s husband appointed Mrs. Al-Marayati to several presidential commissions. In January 1998, Mrs. Clinton organized a reception celebrating the end of Ramadan honoring both Al-Marayatis and Muslim Public Affairs Council.

What do these groups stand for? In September 1993, MPAC signed a statement declaring that the “establishment by force, violence, and terrorism of a Jewish state in Palestine in 1948 as well as the expansion of that state in succeeding years involved the unjust and illegal usurpation of Muslim and Christian lands and rights” and therefore it was illegal to recognize the Jewish state. In February 1996, following a series of suicide bus bombings, an American-born Islamic militant drove his car into Israeli citizens waiting at a bus stop in Jerusalem, killing one and wounding 25. After Israelis opened fire in self-defense on the terrorist, MPAC issued a press release calling accusing Israel of a “terrorist” act and asking the State Department to initiate criminal proceedings against the Jewish state.

Four months after standing alongside Mrs. Clinton at the White House, MPAC senior adviser Maher Hathout spoke in June 1998 at the National Press Club in Washington about Hezbollah, the Lebanon-based group that the U.S. State Department classifies as a terrorist organization. “Hezbollah is fighting for freedom, an organized army, limiting its operations against military people. This is a legitimate target against occupation,” Mr. Hathout declared, “The whole country keeps condemning Hezbollah, I disagree with them on other issues, but on the issue of fighting to liberate their land and attacking only armed forces, this is legitimate, this is an American value–freedom and liberty.”

The American Muslim Alliance’s June fund-raiser for Senate candidate Hillary Clinton was simply a culmination of her outreach to militant Islamic groups. Beyond its anti-Israeli postings on its Web site, the AMA’s head, Agha Saeed, has openly sanctioned the use of “armed resistance” against Israel and declared that the “Zionist occupiers of Palestine can be beaten back.” At its 1997 annual convention, the AMA distributed an article by S.A. Ahsani, head of the AMA’s Texas chapter, denying the existence of “Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek.” At AMA national conferences in 1997, 1998 and 2000, numerous speakers numerous speakers condemned the “Jewish and Zionist” lobbies and their “control” of the United States.

In the end, the issue is whether Mrs. Clinton has unwittingly enabled these groups to gain legitimacy. Clearly she is aware of the danger attending to associations with extremists. In January of this year, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign criticized New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani–then a prospective Senate opponent–for sharing a dais in New York with Joerg Haider, the far-right Austrian head of the Freedom Party. In March, the Clinton campaign manager attacked the mayor for hiring fund-raiser Richard Viguerie–who Clinton aides pointedly noted, had raised money for Patrick Buchanan and had once praised David Duke.

Later, when Rick Lazio said he would be willing to accept an endorsement from the New York branch of the Reform Party, whose presidential candidate is Mr. Buchanan, Mrs. Clinton blasted Mr. Lazio: “I think his [Buchanan’s] record–anti-Semitic comments, his record of intolerant and prejudicial remarks–are ones that I don’t want to be associated with.”

These are noble sentiments. If Mrs. Clinton is willing to denounce Messrs. Haider and Buchanan, why has she associated with groups that have espoused anti-Semitism and supported terrorism?

And regardless of his “agenda”, even if he IS an idiot, he knew about the AMC & Alamoudi (who was subsequently convicted) and published his findings in the Wall Street Journal 4 months before the “brilliant” Faisal Gill began working for them.

“”"Steven Emerson has very little credibility as an “expert” in Militant Islam.

Just Google him and see what comes up.”"”

I googled “Steven Emerson terrorism expert” to see what Steven Emerson’s credibility is as a terrorism expert. Here is what I found in the first seven hits that came up:

#1: Wikipedia: ‘Richard Clarke, the former head of counter-terrorism for the U.S. National Security Council, said of Emerson: “I think of Steve as the Paul Revere of terrorism … We’d always learn things [from him] we weren’t hearing from the FBI or CIA, things which almost always proved to be true.’ [8]” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Emerson

#2: The Harry Walker Agency: ‘… American Jihad accurately and courageously informs the government and people of the United States in detail that their enemy in the war on terror resides not just in the caves of Afghanistan but also in their very midst, even at their leading universities.” -Daniel Pipes, New York Post’ http://www.harrywalker.com/speakers_pitch.cfm?Spea_ID=262

#3: The Harry Walker Agency: ‘In that same feature article, Andrew McCarthy, Assistant U.S. Attorney who prosecuted the 1993 World Trade Center bombings, said “…Emerson was helpful in preparing to cross-examine defense witnesses in the [1993 World Trade Center bombings] case…He’s a valuable source of information and knowledge. And in terms of trying to find places to look for evidence, he’s a very good person to talk to. He’s got a lot of insight.”’ http://www.harrywalker.com/speakers_template.cfm?Spea_ID=262

#4: FAIR: ‘Among the Tribune’s and Emerson’s charges are that Muslims, while at the University of South Florida, were active Islamic Jihad commanders. Emerson told Congress: “One of the world’s most lethal terrorist factions was based out of Tampa.” If that’s so, federal agents must have missed something. Although the FBI and INS have been searching for clues for more than three years, no charges have been filed.”‘ [J. Mark comment: Note that since FAIR issued its criticism Sami al-Arian, former USF professor, has been convicted and is serving time for terrorist conspiracy and civil contempt.] http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1443

#5: The Counterterrorism Blog quoting Steven Emerson: ‘The Chairman of the Fiqh Council, Taha Jaber Al-Alwani, is an unindicted co-conspirator in the case against Sami al-Arian, the alleged North American leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, whose trial began in June 2005 in Tampa, Florida. Mr. Alwani has been named in court documents as an official of several entities in northern Virginia suspected of being connected to terrorist financing. Documents released in the Al Arian trial show that Alwani funded the Islamic Jihad front groups in Tampa.

Another past trustee of the Fiqh Council, Abdurrahman Alamoudi, is serving a 23-year prison sentence for illegal financial dealings with Libya and immigration fraud, has admitted to his part in a plot to assassinate the Saudi Crown Prince, and has vocally announced his support for the terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah. Additionally Alamoudi was just named by Treasury as having been a financier for Al Qaeda. ‘ [J. Mark note: Taha Al-Alwani donated $700 to Ken Cuccinelli, a Faisal Gill endorser, in 2002. Cuccinelli refuses to return his donation from Al-Alwani.]

#6: SteveEmerson.com: ‘Steven Emerson is an internationally recognized expert on terrorism and national security and a best-selling author. Mr. Emerson serves as the Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), an organization he founded in 1995 following the PBS broadcast of his documentary film Jihad in America. Since 9-11, Emerson has testified before and briefed Congress dozens of times on terrorist financing and operational networks of Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and the rest of the worldwide Islamic militant spectrum.’ http://www.steveemerson.com/

#7: Daniel Pipes.org: ‘Lt. General Thomas McInerney: We’ve got four panelists here. I’m going to give very light introductions. I want to say a few things about the Intelligence Summit and we’ll go in. They’ll devote their times, about 5-10 minutes, because we really want to thrust it back to you so we have strong audience participation. They’ll speak from sitting down. They’ll have a mike.

We’ve got Daniel Pipes, whom all of you know. Simply said, Daniel’s the foremost Middle East expert. Robert Spencer, who’s the director of the Jihad Watch. Phyllis Chesler. Phyllis has got 13 books. Robert only has 5. Finally, Steve Emerson, whom Bill O’Reilly always calls on when he wants to have an answer on the jihad.’ http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3465

When the Murray Federal Building in Oklahoma was bombed, he went on national TV saying that it was the work of Islamic Militants.

I think people should be very suspicious of his statements and his agenda.

Once again, I accidentally appended material to the end of what I posted. The last two paragraphs are not written by me, nor are they part of what I was quoting.

“”"When the Murray Federal Building in Oklahoma was bombed, he went on national TV saying that it was the work of Islamic Militants.”"”

The above claim is untrue. FAIR, a harsh critic of Emerson, states it more accurately: “Emerson’s most notorious gaffe was his claim that the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing showed “a Middle Eastern trait” because it “was done with the intent to inflict as many casualties as possible.” (CBS News, 4/19/95)” http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1443

“”"I think people should be very suspicious of his statements and his agenda.”"”

And I think that people should be very suspicious of Faisal’s defenders statements and their agenda.

“If you don’t want Faisal to be your delegate in the 51st, then go to the convention and support Republican Julie Lucas.”

Anon 3:14

In a fair and Democratic process you would be correct. Greg is sticking his neck out , some of us aren’t willing to be blinded by political correctness, some of us don’t want problems, but we all need to learn from France and the United Kingdom, and not make the same mistakes. But if we choose to do nothing and we’re wrong then perhaps it’s simply Allah’s poetic justice.

If you’re in the district, by all means sign up as a delegate and make sure you attend. The only way to easily overcome a questionable process is to have a flood of folks show up who aren’t going to be played. Sheer numbers can overcome just about anything.

I’m quite disturbed by what I received in the mail today… It was a Julie Lucas for Delegate flyer that seems to be sent out to everyone in the 51st District… It directly attacks Faisal Gill and even tells people to “google” his name… Is this the honest and fair Julie Lucas you’ve been defending in your blogs, Greg? Not once has Faisal attempted to run a smear campaign to disrespect Julie Lucas… I’d like a response from you before I say anything else…

“”"I’m quite disturbed by what I received in the mail today… It was a Julie Lucas for Delegate flyer that seems to be sent out to everyone in the 51st District… It directly attacks Faisal Gill and even tells people to “google” his name… Is this the honest and fair Julie Lucas you’ve been defending in your blogs, Greg? Not once has Faisal attempted to run a smear campaign to disrespect Julie Lucas…”"”

Jonathan, if you haven’t viewed the flyer, I suggest you keep your opinion to yourself… Besides the google remark, it clearly attacks Faisal… There’s more on the flyer about Faisal then there is about Julie Lucas’ own campaign… The flyer makes it seem as if Julie’s campaign is more about attacking Faisal and his “bad choices” then the campaign issues themselves… If, at this point in the election, Julie is sending out flyers attacking her opponent and ignoring the true issues of the campaign, she ought to rethink her campaign strategy… Never once has Faisal said anything in his flyers/mailers/website about Julie Lucas and her campaign… His strategy is winning the campaign on the issues… Hers is waiting for Faisal to beat himself… It ain’t happenin… I could keep going, but there’s only two weeks left in this election… We’ll see what happens… Keep on with the smear campaign, boys…